Trial reportAnnals of vascular surgery2014
Prospective randomized trial of ACUSEAL versus Vascu-Guard patching in carotid endarterectomy.
Trial report in Annals of vascular surgery, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01184183 (Prospective Randomized Trial Comparison of Accuseal and Bovine Pericardial Patch During Endarterectomy), which is not on this map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Prospective Randomized Trial Comparison of Accuseal and Bovine Pericardial Patch During Endarterectomy
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- Patches of different types for carotid patch angioplasty.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- A bioabsorbable adhesive wrap for sutureless arterial repair: Initial development and preclinical testing in a rat model.The journal of trauma and acute care surgery · 2026Article
- Medium-term restenosis after carotid endarterectomy by patch type: a single-centre retrospective study comparing biological with synthetic patch materials.Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England · 2025Observational
- Cardiovascular patches applied in congenital cardiac surgery: Current materials and prospects.Bioengineering & translational medicine · 2025Review
- Extracellular Matrix Patches for Endarterectomy Repair.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2021Article
- Mesenchymal stem cell cultivation in electrospun scaffolds: mechanistic modeling for tissue engineering.Journal of biological physics · 2018Review
- Comparative Review of the Treatment Methodologies of Carotid Stenosis.The International journal of angiology : official publication of the International College of Angiology, Inc · 2015Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMultiple studies have been conducted that demonstrate the superiority of patch angioplasty over primary closure for carotid endarterectomy (CEA). Patch angioplasty with polytetrafluorethylene patches (ACUSEAL) have shown results comparable to patch angioplasty with saphenous vein and polyester patches. This is a prospective randomized study to compare the clinical outcomes of CEA using ACUSEAL versus bovine pericardium patching (Vascu-Guard).
methodsTwo hundred patients were randomized (1:1) to either ACUSEAL or Vascu-Guard patching. Demographic data/clinical characteristics were collected. Intraoperative hemostasis times and the frequency of reexploration for neck hematoma were recorded. All patients received immediate and 1-month postoperative duplex ultrasound studies, which were repeated at 6-month intervals. A Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to estimate the risk of restenosis and the stroke-free survival rates.
resultsThe demographics were similar in both groups, except for a higher incidence of current smokers in the ACUSEAL group and more patients with congestive heart failure in the Vascu-Guard group (P = 0.02 and 0.03, respectively). The mean operative internal carotid artery diameter and the mean arteriotomy length were similar in both groups. The mean hemostasis time was 4.90 min for ACUSEAL patching vs. 3.09 min for Vascu-Guard (P = 0.027); however, the mean operative times were similar for both groups (ACUSEAL 2.09 hr vs. Vascu-Guard 2.16 hr, P = 0.669). The incidence of reexploration for neck hematoma was higher in the Vascu-Guard group; 6.12% vs. 1.03% (P = 0.1183). The incidence of perioperative ipsilateral neurologic events was 3.09% for ACUSEAL patching vs. 1.02% for Vascu-Guard patching (P = 0.368). The mean follow-up period was 15 months. The respective freedom from ≥70% carotid restenosis at 1, 2, and 3 years were 100%, 100%, and 100% for ACUSEAL patching vs. 100%, 98%, and 98% for Vascu-Guard patching (P = 0.2478). The ipsilateral stroke-free rates at 1, 2, and 3 years were 96% for ACUSEAL and 99% for Vascu-Guard patching.
conclusionsAlthough CEA patching with ACUSEAL versus Vascu-Guard differed in hemostasis time, the frequency of reexploration for neck hematomas was more frequent in the pericardial patch group; however, only 1 patient had documented suture line bleeding and the surgical reexploration rate is not likely to be patch related. There were not any significant differences in perioperative/late neurologic events and late restenosis in the 2 groups.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.